The Biden administration will for the first time send controversial armor-piercing munitions containing depleted uranium to Ukraine, according to a document seen by Reuters and separately confirmed by two U.S. officials.

cross-posted from: https://lemmus.org/post/587773

Edit: antiwar article, quotes for both articles

The rounds, which could help destroy Russian tanks, are part of a new military aid package for Ukraine set to be unveiled in the next week. The munitions can be fired from U.S. Abrams tanks that, according to a person familiar with the matter, are expected be delivered to Ukraine in the coming weeks.

Although Britain sent depleted uranium munitions to Ukraine earlier this year, this would be the first U.S. shipment of the ammunition and will likely stir controversy. It follows an earlier decision by the Biden administration to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine, despite concerns over the dangers such weapons pose to civilians.

The United States used depleted uranium munitions in massive quantities in the 1990 and 2003 Gulf Wars and the NATO bombing of former Yugoslavia in 1999.

Still, the radioactive material could add to Ukraine’s massive post-war clean-up challenge. Parts of the country are already strewn with unexploded ordnance from cluster bombs and other munitions and hundreds of thousands of anti-personnel mines.

https://news.antiwar.com/2023/09/03/us-to-arm-ukraine-with-toxic-depleted-uranium-ammunition/

But at this point in the war, the administration has shown it’s not concerned about damaging Ukraine’s environment. In July, the US started arming Ukraine with cluster bombs, which spread small submunitions over large areas. Unexploded submunitions, or bomblets, can be found by civilians years or decades after use. Because of their history of killing civilians, cluster munitions have been banned by over 100 countries.

    • Dr. Bluefall@toast.oooEnglish
      9·
      10 months ago

      Unfortunately, in war, there are often no good answers. This time, it seems to be a question of continuing to use standard munitions, of which Ukraine is guzzling by the ton in order to repel the Russians, or use more effective, but more dangerous in the long term, weapons that could have a greater effect in the war effort. A choice of more people dying now or dying later.

      Ukraine has seen its successes in pushing the Russians back, but it needs every edge it can get when fighting a nation several times its size.

        • HumbleFlamingo@beehaw.org
          7·
          10 months ago

          More realistically Ukraine has been requesting them for a while and the US finally gave in since the UK gave them some recently.

        • anachronist@midwest.socialEnglish
          3·
          10 months ago

          When you get an Abrams it comes with DU penetrators. Same as with Challenger which is why Britian has already supplied such weapons. You can’t supply a tank and not supply its ammunition.

      • liv@beehaw.org
        English
        1·
        10 months ago

        there are often no good answers

        No, but some answers are still less bad than others. This… is towards the bad end of the scale.

    • wahming@monyet.ccEnglish
      3·
      10 months ago

      It’s easy to make the call of sending these munitions overseas when it won’t be your own populace suffering the consequences.

      It’s almost as if the Ukrainians aren’t the ones getting a final say in if it’s used…

    • anachronist@midwest.socialEnglish
      3·
      10 months ago

      DU is no more toxic than any other toxic heavy metal. People have this unreasonable fear of anything that is associated with “nuclear” but it’s toxic in the same way mercury or cadmium or lead or arsenic is toxic. Its reactivity is so low it’s often used as a radiation shield.

      Is using Cadmium a war crime?